9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion value inclusive of freight - equalized freight - appellant's invoices do not mention the freight expenses separately and the appellant claims that the invoice price includes the freight charged on equalized basis from place of removal to the place of delivery, the burden of proving that the invoice price includes the freight expenses and its quantum would be on the appellant, but in this case no evidence in support of this claim of the appellant has been produced by them. - Claim of deduction of freight rejected. Deduction of courier charges - Held that: the courier charges for sending the invoice and bank documents cannot be said to be the charges by the reason of or in connection with the sale of the goods and hence the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moval up to the place of delivery, provided the cost of transportation is charged to the buyer in addition to the price of the goods and is shown separately in the invoice for such excisable goods, that in respect of sales to Government departments, the appellant had shown the freight expenses from the place of removal separately in the invoices and hence the freight expenses cannot be included in the assessable value and the Commissioner (Appeals) s order disallowing their exclusion from the assessable value is not correct, that as regards the sale to other buyers where the price charged from the buyers includes the freight expenses on equalized basis, though such equalized freight is not separately shown in the invoices, even in such case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... place of delivery is not mentioned and, therefore, it is not possible to ascertain as to whether the amounts claimed to be freight expenses are actually the expenses incurred towards freight from the place of removal to the place of delivery. On going through the impugned order, we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear finding that though the appellants were asked to produce the purchase orders and GRs to verify the place of delivery and the amounts claimed as freight expenses, they failed to supply the same. In view of this, we upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) s order disallowing the exclusion of the amounts claimed to be freight expenses from the assessable value, as in terms of Rule 5 of Central Excise Valuation Rules w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e includes some charges like freight expenses from the place of removal to the place of delivery, whose deduction is permissible, would be on the assessee. In this case when the appellant s invoices do not mention the freight expenses separately and the appellant claims that the invoice price includes the freight charged on equalized basis from place of removal to the place of delivery, the burden of proving that the invoice price includes the freight expenses and its quantum would be on the appellant, but in this case no evidence in support of this claim of the appellant has been produced by them. In view of this, we hold that Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly disallowed the deduction of freight expenses. 3.3 As regards the third issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
